The Cogency of Risk Assessments

Preventive detention schemes rely on assessments of risk carried out by forensic practitioners. Corrective services departments and other organs of the state inevitably present the approaches they adopt and the tools they employ in this endeavour as being "best practice" and "evidence...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Psychiatry, psychology, and law psychology, and law, 2011-05, Vol.18 (2), p.270-296
Main Author: Coyle, Ian R.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
actuarial measures
Best practice
Bias
Biological organs
Bureaucracy
Courts
Detention
Evidence based
expert evidence
Miscarriage of justice
Objectivity
preventative detention
Preventive detention
public policy
Risk assessment
Sex offenders
structured professional judgement
supervision orders
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Preventive detention schemes rely on assessments of risk carried out by forensic practitioners. Corrective services departments and other organs of the state inevitably present the approaches they adopt and the tools they employ in this endeavour as being "best practice" and "evidence based". Typically these assessments are conducted according to a bureaucratic template and are based on a selected suite of tests that are heavily biased towards actuarial assessment. The validity of this approach is gravely suspect as is the failure of many forensic professionals to properly identify the diagnostic accuracy/inaccuracy of the tests and methods they rely upon in conducting risk assessments. This article iterates the methodological and evidentiary problems with risk assessment of sexual offenders. It is concluded that common extant approaches lack scientific objectivity and fail to provide the courts with cogent evidence. As a result of these errors in investigatory processes miscarriages of justice are inevitable.
ISSN:1321-8719
1934-1687
DOI:10.1080/13218719.2010.543406